There has been quite a bit of news lately regarding noises made about ICANN at the recent meeting of the International Telecom Union (ITU). One proposal from Russian-speaking countries has gone so far as to call for scrapping the GAC, and have ITU give itself veto power over all ICANN board decisions. Even a compromise would essentially undermine the finality of any ICANN Board policy. I want to call your attention to a very thoughtful article in CircleID<http://www.circleid.com/posts/on_the_need_to_separate_the_telecom_business_agenda_from_government_policy/>written by ALAC's own Sivasubramanian Muthusamy, as well as the comments by former Board member Karl Auerbach to another CircleID piece<http://www.circleid.com/posts/20101004_plutocrats_and_the_internet/>written by Gregory Francis. I am very interested in hearing the views of others here on this topic. In some ways it seems that ICANN has practically begged for such intervention, through a history of opacity and an agenda driven by business and self-aggrandised senior staff rather than the public interest. Our own difficulty within At-Large to advance policy -- seen most recently through Board pushback on two important cross-community initiatives -- offers plenty of evidence of that. Then again, I have serious doubts that the ITU's oversight will be any better for the public interest, but rather just assert the worst of all levels of government control. Does ICANN At-Large have any role in this debate? Can we help save ICANN from such capture? Should we welcome it? Should we care? I welcome any comment that will help guide my own approach to this, including (especially!) from Karl and Sivas. - Evan